↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of Thiamin and Its Relevance to the Management of Heart Failure

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition in Clinical Practice, October 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Characteristics of Thiamin and Its Relevance to the Management of Heart Failure
Published in
Nutrition in Clinical Practice, October 2008
DOI 10.1177/0884533608323430
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A. Wooley

Abstract

Heart failure (HF) is a major public health problem in the United States that puts a significant burden on both patients and the healthcare system. The prevalence of malnutrition in HF patients is well-known and correlates with a dramatic decline in quality of life and disease progression, and is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The implication of HF on micronutrient status is underrecognized in the quest to offer "best practice" medical, device, and surgical interventions to this population. The micronutrient thiamin is of particular interest in the management of HF for several reasons: (a) HF is a disease of the elderly whose micronutrient status is in need of attention; (b) HF patients tend to have inadequate nutrient intake, which has been associated with thiamin deficiency; (c) thiamin deficiency (wet beriberi) impairs cardiac performance and can mimic the signs and symptoms of HF thereby potentially exacerbating the underlying disease; (d) use of loop diuretics to manage fluid and sodium imbalances associated with HF may cause the hyperexcretion of thiamin, thereby increasing the risk of deficiency; and (e) the prevention of thiamin deficiency should be a routine component in the overall management of this disease.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Unknown 77 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 25%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 18 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 19 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2014.
All research outputs
#5,867,780
of 22,738,543 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition in Clinical Practice
#452
of 1,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,125
of 89,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition in Clinical Practice
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,738,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 89,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.